Mostly Peaceful Protesters.

[bambino]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

Neither of which is an excuse to federalize the national guard or to send in the marines. By allowing or supporting this action you are giving up your rights and freedoms to the government. Trump should not and does not have the authority to call out the military to put down legitimate protest.

You don’t know history do you? It’s happened before. If local LE can’t protect its citizens, POTUS has the power to nationalize the NG and send in the military. It’s to protect OUR CITIZENS whose rights and safety are being violated by criminals. Especially illegal aliens.

[tommy156]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

Neither of which is an excuse to federalize the national guard or to send in the marines. By allowing or supporting this action you are giving up your rights and freedoms to the government. Trump should not and does not have the authority to call out the military to put down legitimate protest.

MAGA has proven, over and over again, they'll give up any Constitutional right that dear leader tells them to. They don't care what the document even says. They certainly don't care about the right to peacefully assemble and protest.

[tommy156]

Originally Posted by bambino

You don’t know history do you? It’s happened before. If local LE can’t protect its citizens, POTUS has the power to nationalize the NG and send in the military. It’s to protect OUR CITIZENS whose rights and safety are being violated by criminals. Especially illegal aliens.

Local LE was protecting everyone just fine. trump merely engaged in yet another political stunt. That's all this was. Red meat for his knuckle draggers.

[txdot-guy]

Originally Posted by tommy156

Local LE was protecting everyone just fine. trump merely engaged in yet another political stunt. That's all this was. Red meat for his knuckle draggers.

Trump wanted an enemy to contrast against the shitty news coverage that the ICE raids and the big beautiful bill were getting. Federalizing the national guard the way that he did and blaming the California governor for it was just the way to do it.

And some folks fell for it hook line and sinker. I agree with Tommy’s sentiment but not with the “knuckle dragger” line. People have a right to disagree. But not everyone should feel the need to insult the other side. That’s Trump’s schtick.

P.S. does anyone other than me think that “Big Beautiful Bill” sounds like a transvestite working the Old Market in downtown Omaha.

[tommy156]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

Trump wanted an enemy to contrast against the shitty news coverage that the ICE raids and the big beautiful bill were getting. Federalizing the national guard the way that he did and blaming the California governor for it was just the way to do it.

And some folks fell for it hook line and sinker. I agree with Tommy’s sentiment but not with the “knuckle dragger” line. People have a right to disagree. But only Trump and his true acolytes feel the need to insult the other side.

Knuckle draggers = trump's true acolytes

In fact, I think of that as the kindest way I can put it.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

Trump should not and does not have the authority to call out the military to put down legitimate protest.

Originally Posted by tommy156

They certainly don't care about the right to peacefully assemble and protest.

Obvious straw-man arguments, from both of yinz.

Looting and burning, shutting down major freeways, and tossing rocks and bottles at LE are neither "legitimate" nor "peaceful" forms of protest.

It's exasperating and disappointing that I even have to explain this to you both.

[txdot-guy]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Obvious straw-man arguments, from both of yinz.

Looting and burning, shutting down major freeways, and tossing rocks and bottles at LE are neither "legitimate" nor "peaceful" forms of protest.

It's exasperating and disappointing that I even have to explain this to you both.

I agree, It’s exasperating that we have to constantly explain to you that we also don’t want to see any of these examples of protest either. The point you seem to be missing, or possibly just disagree with, is that Trump had no business big footing the california governor the way that he did.

[lustylad]

The point you seem to be missing is the National Guard and Marines are not there to suppress "peaceful" or "legitimate" protests.

Your straw-man arguments assume the opposite is true.

[Salty Again]

Originally Posted by lustylad

The point you seem to be missing is the National Guard and Marines are not there to suppress "peaceful" or "legitimate" protests.

Your straw-man arguments assume the opposite is true.

... And MOST of the poll respondents AGREE.
Please see the most recent Trump/National Guard poll results
from Harvard/Harris and NBC.

... Voters are PLEASED the National Guard was called in.
They don't want the car-burnings, violence and lootings
in their citys.

#### Salty

[txdot-guy]

Originally Posted by lustylad

The point you seem to be missing is the National Guard and Marines are not there to suppress "peaceful" or "legitimate" protests.

Your straw-man arguments assume the opposite is true.

Your straw-man arguments appear to be that the military is there to perform law enforcement operations which they are not allowed to do.

My argument is that the Trump administration is using the optics of these protests to effectively call for military control over civilian government.

By overriding the Governor of California without activating the Posse Comitatus act he’s effectively taking over civilian government.

[Green_Mountain]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

Your straw-man arguments appear to be that the military is there to perform law enforcement operations which they are not allowed to do.

My argument is that the Trump administration is using the optics of these protests to effectively call for military control over civilian government.

By overriding the Governor of California without activating the Posse Comitatus act he’s effectively taking over civilian government.

And when that civilian government refuses to cooperate with Federal law (in this case immigration law), creates an unsafe environment for the citizens of the city, and refuses to act to preserve leftist optics, I say a President should do what Trump did.

In effect Trump had to do the job for Gavin.

“By a huge margin of +12 points, Americans SUPPORT President Trump’s decision to call in the National Guard to suppress anti-ICE riots, 56% to 44% - Harvard/Harris

This is a major blow to the corporate media narrative. Order is popular.”

Dems love to be on the wrong side of issues.

[HDGristle]

Ironically, that same poll assigns most of the blame for the LA unrest to Trump.

Plus, he jumped the gun on purpose. The Gov can't really call his NG when needed when the Pres federalizes them.

Makes it look like he's doing things when he hamstrings the Gov and his ability to respond while actively tossing gas towards an open flame to provoke a reaction.

[txdot-guy]

Originally Posted by Green_Mountain

And when that civilian government refuses to cooperate with Federal law (in this case immigration law), creates an unsafe environment for the citizens of the city, and refuses to act to preserve leftist optics, I say a President should do what Trump did.

In effect Trump had to do the job for Gavin.

“By a huge margin of +12 points, Americans SUPPORT President Trump’s decision to call in the National Guard to suppress anti-ICE riots, 56% to 44% - Harvard/Harris

This is a major blow to the corporate media narrative. Order is popular.”

Dems love to be on the wrong side of issues.

https://www.axios.com/2025/06/10/los...approve-yougov
Nearly half of U.S. adults disapprove of Trump's handling of protests
A plurality of Americans don't approve of the Trump administration's deployment of the National Guard and Marines in response to Los Angeles protests, the latest YouGov polling shows.

https://www.newsweek.com/us-veterans...-guard-2085195
US Veterans Oppose Trump's 'Illegal' Takeover Of National Guard
A group of veterans have filed an amicus brief in support of California Governor Gavin Newsom's suit against President Donald Trump's deployment of National Guard troops in Los Angeles.

Newsom has called the deployment "illegal" and said that it "poses a dangerous and serious risk to Americans who may find themselves in the crosshairs of troops ordered to act against their fellow Americans."

The amicus brief, filed by U.S. Army and Navy Secretaries and Retired Four-Star Admirals and Generals, says that the troop deployment is poor for soldiers' morale as they are not prepared or trained to combat Americans, that local law enforcement should be in charge of crowd control, and that this move will erode trust between the military and civilians.


I could go on but suffice it to say that polling is divided on the issue and doesn’t really mean squat. What Trump is doing is illegal and unconstitutional. I propose we wait for the lawsuits to be decided.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by HDGristle

Ironically, that same poll assigns most of the blame for the LA unrest to Trump.

What are you even talking about? You're making stuff up again.

Show me the exact Harvard/Harris poll question and data where respondents "assigned most of the blame for the LA unrest to Trump".

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

Your straw-man arguments appear to be that the military is there to perform law enforcement operations which they are not allowed to do.

You're not making sense. The National Guard has been called up hundreds of times in our nation's history to help suppress domestic violence. Usually at the request/with the consent of a state's governor, but occasionally without it.

Each time it happened, the National Guard was tasked with helping "to perform law enforcement operations". And you're telling us they aren't allowed to do that? So all those hundreds of call-ups over many decades of US history were illegal?

Please elaborate.